Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 7 (2013) 863 866

Water Rock Interaction [WRI 14]

The effects of shale gas exploration and hydraulic fracturing

on the quality of water resources in the United States
Avner Vengosha*, Nathaniel Warnera, Rob Jacksona, Tom Darraha,
a

Nicholas School of Environment, Duke University, Box 90227, Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States

Abstract
Advances in drilling technologies and production strategies such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing have
significantly improved the production of natural gas by stimulating fluid flow from wells. Since 2008, these
technological developments have spurred exponential growth of gas well drilling across the U.S. While the new
drilling for shale gas and hydraulic fracturing technologies have dramatically changed the energy landscape in the
U.S., recent scientific findings show evidence for contamination of water resources. This paper provides key
observations for the potential risks of shale gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing on the quality of water resources and
include: (1) stray gas contamination of shallow groundwater overlying shale gas basins; (2) pathways and hydraulic
connectivity between the deep shale gas formations and the overlying shallow drinking water aquifers; and (3)
inadequate disposal of produced and flowback waters associated with shale gas exploration that causes contamination
of surface waters and long-term ecological effects. By using geochemical (e.g., Br/Cl) integrated with oxygen,
hydrogen, strontium, radium, and boron isotopic tracers, we have characterized the geochemical fingerprints of brines
from several shale gas basins in the USA, including the Utica and Marcellus brines in the Appalachian Basin and the
Fayetteville brines in Arkansas. We use these geochemical fingerprints to delineate the impact of shale gas associated
fluids on the environment.

Published
by Elsevier
B.V. B.V.
2013
2012The
TheAuthors.
Authors.
Published
by Elsevier
Selection
peer-review
underunder
responsibility
of the Organizing
and Scientific
Committee
of WRI 14of
2013
Selectionand/or
and/or
peer-review
responsibility
of Organizing
and Scientific
Committee
WRI 14 2013.
Keywords: shale gas; hydraulic fracturing, stray gas; salinity; water contamination; produced water.

1. Introduction
Recent advances in drilling technologies and production strategies such as horizontal drilling and
hydraulic fracturing have significantly improved the production of hydrocarbons by stimulating the flow
of gas and liquids from impermeable geologic formations [1-3]. These technological improvements have
increased oil and gas exploration in numerous unconventional fields across the U.S., particularly in the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-919-681-8050; fax: +1-919-684-5833.
E-mail address: vengosh@duke.edu

1878-5220 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing and Scientific Committee of WRI 14 2013
doi:10.1016/j.proeps.2013.03.213

864

Avner Vengosh et al. / Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 7 (2013) 863 866

Barnett, Haynesville, Bakken, Fayetteville, Woodford, Utica, and Marcellus shale formations (Figure 1).
The U.S. Department of Energy Energy Information Agency (EIA) projects that by 2035 shale gas
production will increase to 340 billion cubic meters per year, about 50% of the total projected gas
production in the U.S [4].

Fig. 1. Map of shale gas basins in the USA. Map was prepared by Cidney Christie (Duke University), based on data
from U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

The increased extraction of natural gas resources from the shale gas basins in the U.S. has increased
awareness for possible environmental consequences, particularly contamination of shallower drinking
water aquifers. The debate surrounding the safety of shale gas extraction and hydraulic fracturing [5] has
focused on stray gas migration to shallow groundwater [6] and to the atmosphere [5], possible hydraulic
connectivity between deep shale formations and shallow aquifers [7], water use [8], air quality [9]as well
as the potential for contamination from hydraulic fracturing fluid and/or produced brines containing toxic
substances during drilling, transport, and disposal [10-12]. As shale gas exploration is expected to become
global, with new initiatives and explorations in China, Germany, Poland, Australia, and New Zealand, the
results that are emerging from field-based studies in the U.S. are vital for a global assessment of the
environmental risks of shale gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing. This paper provides an overview on
three major possible impacts on water quality induced from shale gas exploration and hydraulic

Avner Vengosh et al. / Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 7 (2013) 863 866

fracturing: (1) shallow groundwater contamination; (2) possible hydraulic pathways between deep and
shallow formations; and (3) disposal of produced and flowback waters.
2. Shallow groundwater contamination
One of the most intensive debates on the environmental safety of shale gas exploration and hydraulic
fracturing is the possible contamination of drinking water wells in areas of extensive shale gas operation.
Our previous study in northeastern Pennsylvania has shown elevated levels of methane in wells located
near (<1 km) shale gas drilling sites, whereas wells located away (>1 km) from these areas had much
lower methane concentrations [6]. In contrast, it was argued that relatively high methane in this part of the
Appalachian Basin is due to natural flux of methane and is not linked to the shale gas drilling [13]. The
ability to delineate methane sources and thus the distinction between natural flux and anthropogenic
contamination is based on the different isotopic (13C-CH4; 2H-CH4) and geochemical (propane/methane
ratios) compositions of thermogenic relative to biogenic methane sources. It was shown that the elevated
methane in drinking water wells near the shale gas wells had a thermogenic composition (e.g., heavier
13
C-CH4) than wells located 1 km away from shale gas sites with an apparent mixed thermogenicbiogenic composition. New emerging noble gas data [14] reinforce the carbon isotopes and hydrocarbon
ratios data and indicate that the high levels of methane exceeding the hazard level of 10 mg/L are indeed
related to stray gas contamination directly linked to shale gas operation. The most probable mechanism
for stray gas contamination is leaking through inadequate cement on casing or through well annulus from
intermediate formations [6, 14].
In contrast to stray gas contamination, our previous work has not shown evidence for actual
contamination of dissolved constituents in shallow aquifers in northeastern Pennsylvania, even for wells
with high methane contents [6,7]. New data from 236 domestic wells from Pennsylvania and New York
states show no systematic difference in chloride, barium, chromium, boron, and arsenic contents in wells
located in active zones (<1 km) and non-active areas (>1 km). In contrast, an EPA study reported the
presence of synthetic organic compounds (e.g., diethylene glycol) as well as elevated chloride and
potassium in two high-pH deep wells near extensive shale gas operation in Pavillion, Wyoming[15].
2. Hydraulic connectivity between deep and shallow formations
The fragility of shallow aquifer systems to possible contamination of fugitive gas, fracking fluids,
and/or formation water depends primarily on the hydraulic connectivity between deep shale gas
formations and the overlying shallow aquifers. In the Appalachian Basin, the depth of the Marcellus Shale
is about one to two km, yet an intensive fracture network system provides a possible conduit for gas and
fluids migration [16]. Evidence for natural pathways from deep formations to shallow aquifers in
northeastern Pennsylvania is shown by the distinctive geochemical (elevated Br/Cl) and isotopic (87Sr/86Sr
ratios) compositions of saline groundwater identified in shallow aquifers [7]. The Na-Ca-Cl composition
of the saline shallow groundwater mimics the composition of the Marcellus brines and different from the
Ca-HCO3 and Na-HCO3compositions that characterize local groundwater. In addition, the 87Sr/86Sr ratios
of the saline groundwater overlap the 87Sr/86Sr ratios measured in the Marcellus brines, inferring mixing
between the deep Marcellus brines and shallow groundwater [7].
3. Disposal of produced and flowback waters
The high levels of salinity (TDS up to 300,000 mg/L), toxic elements (e.g., barium), and radioactivity
of produced and flowback waters from the Marcellus Shale [7, 10-12, 17-18] and other shale gas basins

865

866

Avner Vengosh et al. / Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 7 (2013) 863 866

present new challenges for handling the wastewater that is generated together with the natural gas. Our
data show that disposal of the hypersaline wastewaters to waterways in western Pennsylvania, even
through a brine treatment facility, generates a highly saline plume (TDS up to 100,000 mg/L) and
radioactivity in both downstream surface waters and river sediments. We use the strontium isotopes to
determine the source of the wastewater and to distinguish produced waters originated from shale gas from
conventional oil and gas production. Alternative disposal of wastewaters through deep-well injection
could induce seismic events, as shown in different sites in the U.S. [19]. Overall, one of the direct
unquestioned impacts of shale gas exploration on water quality is the issue of management and disposal
of wastewater associated with the gas production. The increase use of hydraulic fracturing technology for
enhancement and tapping of also conventional oil and gas wells is expected to increase the volume of
these types of wastewaters in the U.S.
References
[1] Pacala S, and Socolow R. Stabilization wedges: Solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies.
Science 2004; 305: 968-972.
[2] Kargbo DM, Wilhelm RG, Campbell DJ. Natural Gas Plays in the Marcellus Shale: Challenges and Potential Opportunities. Env
Sci Technol 2010; 44: 56795684.
[3] Kerr RA.Natural Gas From Shale Bursts Onto the Scene.Science2010; 328; 1624-1626.
[4] US Energy Information Agency. Annual Energy Outlook 2011 with Projections to 2035. Washington, D.C.
[5] Howarth RW, Santoro R, Ingraffea A. Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations. Climatic
Change 2011; 106: 679-690.
[6] Osborn SG, Vengosh A, Warner NR, Jackson RB. Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and
hydraulic fracturing. PNAS 2011; 108: 8172-8176.
[7] Warner NR, Jackson, RB, Darrah, TH, Osborn, SG, Down A, Zhao K, White A, Vengosh A. Geochemical evidence for possible
natural migration of Marcellus Formation brine to shallow aquifers in Pennsylvania. PNAS 2012 (doi: 10.1073/pnas.1121181109).
[8] NicotJP, Scanlon, BR. Water Use for Shale-Gas Production in Texas, U.S.. Env Sci Technol 2012; 46: 3580-3586.
[9] Colborn, T, Schultz, K, Herrick L, Kwiatkowski C. An Exploratory Study of Air Quality near Natural Gas Operations; Human
Ecological Risk Assessment 2012 (in press).
[10] Dresel P, Rose A. Chemistry and origin of oil and gas well brines in Western Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey.
4th series Open-File Report OFOG 10-01.0; 2010, p 48.
[11] Rowan E, EngleM, Kirby C, Kraemer T. Radium content of oil- and gas-field produced waters in the northern Appalachian
Basin (USA)Summary and discussion of data. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011; 513: 31 pp.
[12] Gregory KB, Vidic RD, Dzombak DA. Water management challenges associated with the production of shale gas by hydraulic
fracturing. Elements2011; 7: 181186.
[13] Molofsky LJ, Connor JA, Farhat SK, Wylie AS, Jr, Wagner T. Methane in Pennsylvania water wells unrelated to Marcellus
shale fracturing. Oil Gas J 2011; 109: 5467.
[14] DarrahT, Vengosh A, Jackson RB, Warner N. Constraining the source and migration of natural gas in shallow aquifers within
active shale gas production zone: insights from integrating noble gas and hydrocarbon isotope geochemistry. GSA meeting, 4-7 Nov
2012, Charlotte, NC, USA.
[15] Di Giulio DC, Wilkin RT, Miller C, Oberley G. Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Report 2011 (http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/).
[16] Warner NR, Jackson, RB, Darrah, TH, Osborn, SG, Down A, Zhao K, White A, Vengosh A. Reply to Terry Engelder:
Potential for fluid migration from the Marcellus Formation remains possible. PNAS 2012 (in press).
[17] Chapman EC, Capo R, Stewart BW, Kirby C, Hammack RW, Schroeder K, Edenborn HM. Geochemical and strontium isotope
characterization of produced waters from Marcellus Shale natural gas extraction. Environ Sci Technol. 2012; 46: 35453553
[18] Haluszczak LO, Rose RW, Kump LR. Geochemical evaluation of flowback brine from Marcellus gas wells in Pennsylvania,
USA. App Geoch 2012 (in press).
[19] Hitzman MW. Induced seismicity potential and energy technologies. GSA meeting, 4-7 Nov 2012, Charlotte, NC, USA 2012.